2002
DOI: 10.1080/13596740200200134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

From the invisible hand to the invisible handshake: marketing higher education

Abstract: This article considers that the fundamentals of marketing which were developed to increase business efficiency fail to fulfil the needs of higher education. An alternative premise is proposed based on the notions of temporality, confidence and trust. The article is timely as higher education embraces a business model of competition almost without questioning the appropriateness of the tools it uses.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
(33 reference statements)
0
35
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Hemsley-Brown and Oplatka (2006) concluded that "the literature on higher education marketing is incoherent, even inchoate, and lacks theoretical models that reflect upon the particular context of higher education and the nature of their services." This can be a barrier to higher education marketing efforts since the traditional business marketing fundamentals do not fully address the needs of higher education institutions as they are mostly based on consumptive models (Gibbs, 2002). Gibbs (2002) suggests that higher education marketing has to be viewed from a model of collaborative relationships.…”
Section: Higher Education and Marketingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Hemsley-Brown and Oplatka (2006) concluded that "the literature on higher education marketing is incoherent, even inchoate, and lacks theoretical models that reflect upon the particular context of higher education and the nature of their services." This can be a barrier to higher education marketing efforts since the traditional business marketing fundamentals do not fully address the needs of higher education institutions as they are mostly based on consumptive models (Gibbs, 2002). Gibbs (2002) suggests that higher education marketing has to be viewed from a model of collaborative relationships.…”
Section: Higher Education and Marketingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This can be a barrier to higher education marketing efforts since the traditional business marketing fundamentals do not fully address the needs of higher education institutions as they are mostly based on consumptive models (Gibbs, 2002). Gibbs (2002) suggests that higher education marketing has to be viewed from a model of collaborative relationships. Other researchers have argued that a relationship marketing approach best fits institutions of higher education (Helgesen, 2008;Klassen, 2002) particularly when regarded from an ethical point of view (Gibbs & Murphy, 2009).…”
Section: Higher Education and Marketingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In an environment of competition, most educational institutions have recognized that they need to market themselves and as a result, extensive literature on the transfer of the practices and concepts of marketing from other sectors to HE has been developed (Gibbs, 2002). According to Oplatka and Hemsley-Brown (2004), literature on education marketing initiated in the UK and US in the 1980s and was based on models developed for use by the business sector.…”
Section: Previous Research On Higher Education Marketingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several researchers have questioned whether higher education as a market is a problem or solution (Gibbs, 2001). The experience findings and scientific result sharing goes to the details of the issue like organisation of the marketing process for higher education (Czsikova, et al, 2014), promoting the respective higher education establishment (Muniz and Guinn, 2001) and finding different marketing approaches of higher education (Gibbs, 2002). Factors of a student market in higher education were grouped together with the following labels: university, college, employability aspects, course content, student experience, sporting aspects, financial aspects, direct sources, media sources and social sources.…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%